Chennai Court May 2007 Judgments

The Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd. Rep. by Its Branch Manager and the Ori ...

Court: Chennai

Reported in: 2009ACJ1081; (2007)6MLJ384

S. Manikumar, J.1. The Civil Miscellaneous Appeals are filed by the Insurance Company challenging the finding of the Tribunal with regard to the liability of the Company to pay compensation. C.M.A. No. 1163 of 2005 is filed against the award passed in M.C.O.P.No. 1285 of 2003 on the file of the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal (Additional District Judge/Fast Track Court No. 2) Tirunelveli, dated 20.09.2005. C.M.A. Nos. 8 to 12 of 2004 are filed against the award passed in respect of M.C.O.P. Nos. 369 to 373 of 2002 on the file of the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal (Sub Court) Tenkasi dated 29.09.2005. Since the question of law and the facts involved are one and the same, all the appeals are taken up together and disposed of by a common judgment.2. Brief facts leading to the appeal are as follows: On 14.07.2002 at 8.45 a.m., when Velsamy (since deceased) and five others were travelling in an Autorickshaw bearing Registration No. TN-72-U-1175, owned by the second respondent and insured wit...

Srikumar Textiles (P) Ltd., Vs. Sundaram Finance Ltd.

Court: Chennai

Reported in: 2008(1)ARBLR217(Madras)

S. Manikumar, J.1. The appeals are preferred against the orders, dismissing the petitions filed under Order 9 Rule 9 read with Section 151 of C.P.C., to restore the arbitration Original Petitions, which were dismissed for default, on 13.10.2004.2. Since the appeals involve common question of law and facts, they are taken up together and disposed of by common judgment.3. Brief facts leading to the appeals are as follows:The first appellant is an industrial Textiles Mill. registered as a Private limited company under Indian Companies Act. The appellants 2 and 3, wife and husband are the Directors and Guarantors to the first appellant company. They borrowed money from M/s. Sundaram Finance Ltd., the respondent herein. On the applications filed by the finance company/respondent, the Arbitrator passed a common award. Aggrieved by the award, the appellants filed Arbitration Original Petitions before the Principal Sub Judge, Madurai under Section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 19...

Assistant Commissioner of Income Vs. First Leasing Company of India

Court: Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Chennai

Reported in: (2008)115TTJ(Chennai)802

1. This appeal by the Revenue is directed against the order of Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) dated 10,9.2004 and pertains to assessment year 2001-02.2. The first issue raised is that Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) erred in deleting the disallowance of depreciation claimed on sale and lease back transactions with Tamil Nadu Electricity Board amounting to Rs. 19,72,13,568/-. During the present assessment year the assessee company, First Leasing Company of India Ltd. (for short FLCI) entered into 14 sale and lease back agreements with Tamil Nadu Electricity Board (for short TNEB). The assets claimed to have been purchased from TNEB and leased back to them were in the nature of meters, capacitor banks and outdoor circuit breakers. The total of such assets came to Rs. 39,44,27,143/-. These assets were eligible for 100% depreciation and since they were not used for more than 182 days, the assessee restricted the claim to 50% of the depreciation. Actually the lease agreement was...

T. Sivagnanam (deceased by LR's) and Ors. Vs. Muthu Backialakshmni ali ...

Court: Chennai

Reported in: AIR2007Mad245

V. Dhanapalan, J.1. The plaintiff and his legal heirs are the appellants in this appeal.2. The plaintiff filed a suit for declaration that the defendants 1 and 2 are having only life interest in the suit property and that the plaintiff and his heirs are entitled to the suit property after the life-time of the defendants 1 and 2.3. The case of the plaintiff, in brief, is that he is the brother of one T.K.T. Ramanathan Pillai and the defendants, who are sisters, are the wives of the said Ramanathan Pillai; the marriage of the second defendant with Ramanathan Pillai is null and void since it took place when the first defendant was alive; the suit property belongs to Ramanathan Pillai and he executed a registered Will dated 3-12-1965 with regard to his entire properties, breathing last on 22-8-1966; according to the said Will, a provision was made for maintenance of the defendants, giving them a limited right of enjoyment over the suit property till their life-time, without any right of al...

Manager, Bank of India, Chennai MaIn Branch, Chennai Vs. G. Kandaswamy

Court: Tamil Nadu State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Chennai

K. SAMPATH J. {Open Court} The Opposite party in OP No.243/2001 on the file of the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, Chennai (North) is the appellant herein. The case of the complainant was as follows: - He had a savings bank account with the opposite party. He preferred a complaint to the Opposite party about missing of his cheques and requested the Manager of the Opposite party bank to stop payment of three cheques and got an acknowledgment in addition to debiting a sum of Rs.75/- in his account towards charges for stop payment. When a cheque was presented on 31/3/2001 i.e., 12 days after receiving the instruction from the complainant, the cheque was returned by the opposite party with an endorsement as insufficient funds instead of the endorsement as payment stopped. By doing so, the opposite party had committed deficiency in service. The complainant later came to know that the cheque had been stolen by one of the partners and presented for Rs.1,45,000/-. The signature fo...

Balakrishnan and Kunja Alias Dhakshinamurthy Vs. Rajalakshmi

Court: Chennai

Reported in: (2007)3MLJ851

K. Mohan Ram, J.1. The unsuccessful defendants in O.S. No. 236 of 1990 on the file of the District Munsif Court at Thiruvarur who has suffered a decree for specific performance has filed the above second appeal against the judgment and decree passed in A.S. No. 12 of 1992 on the file of the District Court, Nagapattinam confirming the judgment and decree passed in O.S. No. 236 of 1990.2. The case of the respondent is that the first appellant agreed to sell the suit property to her for a sum of Rs. 3,240/- on 15.06.1990 and he has received an advance of Rs. 2,101/- from her. The terms of sale was reduced into writing and an agreement of sale was executed by the first appellant in favour of the respondent. The respondent through her husband requested the 1st appellant to execute the sale deed but the first appellant was evading, hence a legal notice was issued to the appellant and another brother Paranjjothi. The first respondent alone sent a reply stating that there was a mediation after...

Ansaldo Energia Spa Vs. the Asst. Director of Income Tax

Court: Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Chennai

Reported in: LC(2008)(2)358

1. This appeal by the assessee is directed against the order of CTT(A) and relates to the assessment year 2000-01.2. Shri J.D. Mistry, learned Counsel for the assessee appeared before us. Department was represented by Shri Shaji P. Jacob. Shri Mistry neatly identified the issues involved in this case as under: i) Whether conditions precedent for assuming jurisdiction to make enhancement under Section 25 l of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (in short 'the Act') did exist under the facts and circumstances of the case? ii) Whether the order of CIT(A) was in conformity with the principles of natural justice? iii) Whether ASPL was a facade created for the purpose of taxation, ex consequent its corporate veil be lifted for consolidating the four contracts? iv) Whether there exists permanent establishment in India in relation to offshore supply activities? v) Whether there exists business connection with Neyveli Lignite Corporation (in short 'NLCT) and Ansaldo Fnergia SpA? 3. Over and above at the ...